(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "SFO International Airport magazine"

3 1223 07805 2041 



im^rtHIITIOHflL mftPOBT MflGflZIHC 



Volume 1, Number 1 



March 1980 



SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT REPORTS 
INCREASED PASSENGERS WITH FEWER FLIGHTS 



DOCUfVjEfJTS DEPT. 

^^^^^ *^ :5 1980 



SAN 7RANC.'SC0 

The effects of rising fuel costs and a worsening econofi^^^-^ LIBRARY 
situation are apparent at the San Francisco International Airport. 
A ten-year comparison illustrates that passenger volumes can in- 
crease dramatically while the number of flights is declining. 



: J 1 





Such statistics provide good news for Airport neighbors whose 
^y Airport noise. 

'79 commercial air carrier operations at San 
»nal Airport declined by more than 18%, while 
lal passengers increased by 70% during the 



idled a total of 391,334 operations in 1969 of 
-litary and general aviation operations. 

Airport operations dropped to 367,765, of 
most 307o, were by military, general aviation 
L-jet carriers. 

lere were 306,929 landings and take-offs by 
ers. Ten years later, during 1979, 259,978 
tions took place, a decrease of 46,951 move- 
.5%. 

nd, passenger volume of 14,470,964 in 1969, 
to the 1979 terminal volume of 24,159,650 
, increase. 



San Francisco Public Library 



Government liifor:T?2tion Center 
San Francisco Public Library 
IOC Larkin Street, 5lti Floor 
San Franciscx), CA 94102 

REFERENCE BOOK 

Not to be taken from the Library 



hird level non-jet carrier activity was dra- 
matxc m ly/y witn a 40% increase over 1978 to 34,691 operations. 
Almost two-thirds of this increase took place during the second 
half of the year. 

Deregulation brought new trunk and international carriers to 
San Francisco. Eastern and Alaska added domestic service, while 
Air Canada, British Airways, Lufthansa, Mexicana and Singapore 
opened new foreign cities to San Francisco. 

Intra-state, San Francisco is now served by nine third level 
carriers. As the major jet carriers pull our of less profitable 
California cities, the air transportation gap is quickly filled 
by the third levels using conventional, non-jet aircraft. This 

D 

REF 

387.736 -more- 

8105 

1980 



IHTCBHflTIOHflL mBPOBT MflGflZIHC 

Volume I, Number 1 March 1980 

DOCUa^ENTS DEPT. 

SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT REPORTS tMn • 

INCREASED PASSENGERS WITH FEWER FLIGHTS '^"^^ ' • 1980 

SAM rSAfiCSSCO 

The effects of rising fuel costs and a worsening econofii/^^-'^ LIBRARY 
situation are apparent at the San Francisco International Airport. 
A ten-year comparison illustrates that passenger volijmes can in- 
crease dramatically while the number of flights is declining. 

Such statistics provide good news for Airport neighbors whose 
lives are impacted by Airport noise. 

From 1969 to 1979 commercial air carrier operations at San 
Francisco International Airport declined by more than 18%, while 
the number of terminal passengers increased by 70% during the 
same ten-year period. 

The Airport handled a total of 391,334 operations in 1969 of 
which 84,405 were military and general aviation operations. 

In 1979, total Airport operations dropped to 367,765, of 
which 107,787, or almost 30%, were by military, general aviation 
and third level, non-jet carriers. 

During 1969, there were 306,929 landings and take-offs by 
commercial air carriers. Ten years later, during 1979, 259,978 
commercial jet operations took place, a decrease of 46,951 move- 
ments or more than 157o. 

On the other hand, passenger volume of 14,470,964 in 1969, 
pales in comparison to the 1979 terminal volume of 24,159,650 
air travelers, a 65% increase. 

The growth of third level non-jet carrier activity was dra- 
matic in 1979 with a 40% increase over 1978 to 34,691 operations. 
Almost two-thirds of this increase took place during the second 
half of the year. 

Deregulation brought new trunk and international carriers to 
San Francisco. Eastern and Alaska added domestic service, while 
Air Canada, British Airways, Lufthansa, Mexicana and Singapore 
opened new foreign cities to San Francisco. 

Intra-state, San Francisco is now served by nine third level 
carriers. As the major jet carriers pull our of less profitable 
California cities, the air transportation gap is quickly filled 
by the third levels using conventional, non-jet aircraft. This 



-more- 



is good news for those who live close to the Airport since these 
smaller aircraft have a negligible noise impact on neighboring 
communities . 

The reduced noise impact from fewer scheduled jet operations 
showed up in the Airport's noise monitoring system. The average 
Community Noise Equivalent Level of all 13 monitoring stations 
was 70.6 decibels in the fourth quarter of 1978, but only 68.3 
decibels in the forth quarter of 1979. 

The current trend of increased service by third level car- 
riers, coupled with reduction of operations by the major carriers, 
will probably continue through 1980 and this carries a promise of 
even further noise relief to the communities of South San Fran- 
cisco, San Bruno, Millbrae and Burlingame which border on San 
Francisco International Airport. 




IHTeBHATIOHIIL AmPORT MAGflZIHE 



Volume 1, Nijmber 2 



March 1980 oOCUfVlENTS DZ 

APR 1 m 



JOINT ACTION PLAN FOR 
SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 



Resulting from a two year co- 
operative Joint Land Use Study by 
the City and County of San Fran- 
cisco, which owns and operates 
San Francisco International Air- 
port, and San Mateo County, with- 
in whose political boundaries 
the Airpoift lies, a Joint Action 
Plan to reduce aircraft noise, 
improve ground access and improve 
air quality is scheduled for 
adoption by the end of March 1980, 

The plan contains 29 specific 
noise abatement actions provision- 
ally approved by the Joint Powers 
Board, which includes three mem- 
bers each from San Francisco and 
San Mateo Counties. 

In Airport Noise Monitoring 
and Management the plan recom- 
mends centralizing the noise 
abatement function, improving 
the noise monitoring system, 
expanding the airport rules and 
regulations pertaining to noise 
and expanding the airport ' s com- 
munity information program. 

Flight procedure changes 
recommended include use of 
nightime noise abatement run- 
way, visual noise abatement de- 
parture procedures, increasing 
altitudes of aircraft, visual 
noise abatement approach pro- 
cedures, avoidance of Foster 
City which lies under the pre- 
ferential approach, and noise 
abatement climb power reduction. 



Recommendations for aircraft 
noise limits, restrictions and 
incentives include a maximum 
noise limit, reduced night run- 
ups, noise allocation, limited 
night operations and econmic 
incentives. 

The Joint Powers Board has 
also examined land use policies 
in the neighboring communities. 

The draft plan recommends a 
demonstration sound proofing pro- 
ject to find out if noise in- 
sulation and aviagation easements 
are acceptable and effective 
noise abatement measures. 

The plan has excluded re- 
sidential acquisition by the 
Airport as an option. 

Other excluded actions, 
identified as being in the 
"last resort" category, are re- 
ductions in operations and new 
or extended runways. 

Recommendations in the plan 
on issues other than noise in- 
clude a local street traffic 
program, a public transit im- 
provement program, a program to 
control air emissions by towing 
aircraft between terminals and 
runways, reducing aircraft engine 
and aiixiliary power unit operat- 
ions, developing odor standards 
for kerosene emissions, and 
supporting the current auto emis- 



sions control program. 

Implementing the recommen- 
dations of the Joint Powers 
Action Plan will require sep- 
arate action by many agencies. 



The Joint Powers Board is ex- 
pected to continue in existence 
following the issuance of the 
final report and to assist in the 
transition from planning to im- 
plementation of the action plan. 



SFO International Airport Magazine is published by the 
office of Director of Airports, Airports Commission, City and 
County of San Francisco. Right to reproduce information con- 
tained herein is granted with appropriate credit. 

Address contributed articles, questions or comments to 
SFO International Airport Magazine, c/o Community Affairs, 
San Francisco International Airport, San Francisco, CA 94128. 



3 1223 07805 2041 \